4.3 Article

Use of a prosthetic mesh to prevent parastomal hernia during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection: a randomized controlled trial

期刊

HERNIA
卷 16, 期 6, 页码 661-667

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10029-012-0952-z

关键词

Parastomal; Hernia; Mesh; Prevention; Laparoscopy

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prevention of parastomal hernia represents an important aim when a permanent stoma is necessary. The objective of this work is to assess whether implantation of a prophylactic prosthetic mesh during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection contributed to reduce the incidence of parastomal hernia. Rectal cancer patients undergoing elective laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with permanent colostomy were randomized to placement of a large-pore lightweight mesh in the intraperitoneal/onlay position by the laparoscopic approach (study group) or to the control group (no mesh). Parastomal hernia was defined radiologically by a CT scan performed after 12 months of surgery. The usefulness of subcutaneous fat thickness measured by CT to discriminate patients at risk of parastomal hernia was assessed by ROC curve analysis. Thirty-six patients were randomized, 19 to the mesh group and 17 to the control group. Parastomal hernia was detected in 50 % of patients in the mesh group and in 93.8 % of patients in the control group (P = 0.008). The AUC for thickness of the subcutaneous abdominal was 0.819 (P = 0.004) and the optimal threshold 23 mm. Subcutaneous fat thickness a parts per thousand yen23 mm was a significant predictor of parastomal hernia (odds ratio 15.7, P = 0.010), whereas insertion of a mesh was a protective factor (odds ratio 0.06, P = 0.031). Use of prophylactic large-pore lightweight mesh in the intraperitoneal/onlay position by a purely laparoscopic approach reduced the incidence of parastomal hernia formation. Subcutaneous fat thickness a parts per thousand yen23 mm measured by CT was an independent predictor of parastomal hernia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据